Search

The contribution is devoted to the authorship of a drawing with the subject of the Beheading of St Catherine from the collection of Jiří Karásek ze Lvovic, saved today in the Museum of Literature of the National Literature Memorial. Based on a comparison with a drawing of a similar subject and composition, the author of the article has come to the view that Karásek’s drawing can be attributed to the Augsburg painter Johann Matthias Kager (1566–1634) and may be considered one of the preparatory compositional studies for the now defunct altarpiece in the presbytery of the Dominican convent in Augsburg. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The development of a professional network, as well as long-standing disputes, among the most prominent representatives of Czech modernism at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries — F. X. Šalda on the one hand, and Arnošt Procházka and the Moderní revue (especially Jiří Karásek) on the other — can be traced through several stages. First, 1893–1895, a period of mutual curiosity and emerging factions, from the earliest meeting up to the formal manifestation of Česká moderna, which was preceded by the establishment of the Moderní revue as first independent literary platform of the 1890s. Second, 1895–1900, a period in which various trends converged in the connection of art to life and society, and in a confrontation with other emerging, alternative concepts of modernism, namely Synthetism. Third, 1900–1910, a period that looks back, from the strata of generational polemics, culminating in the controversy surrounding Šalda’s pseudonyms, to the accusation of Karásek in what has come to be known as the anonymous letters affair. Fourth, 1910–1925, when each side declared hostility towards, or simply ignored, the other’s role in Czech modernism, from the conclusion of the anonymous letters affair to Procházka’s death. This study focuses in particular on the two initial periods, on the roots of the polemic, and on key moments in the 1890s: that is, on the onset and gradual differentiation of modernist literary creation and criticism in all its forms, on the transformations and extremes of the polemic as the example of a genre whose essence is dialogue and misunderstanding in equal parts. While the polemic is often rife with personal attacks, it also tends to crystallize in a mirror that reveals the collisions and transformations of Czech modern aesthetic thinking, and that illuminates connections and transitions in the field of literary and cultural production.

The article examines vampires in Czech Decadent literature as polyvalent symbols that stand simultaneously for culture as a vampiric force and for decadence as a poisonous and infectious phenomenon. Vampires can also be associated with homosexuality, particularly in the work of Jiří Karásek ze Lvovic. In addition, they represent the power of the Austro-Hungarian Empire which had been draining the blood of Bohemia for centuries, leaving Prague a “dead city”, as well as the Czechs’ resistance to their subaltern status through a poisonous entropy that destroys not only the oppressors but also Czechs themselves. As such, Czech vampires have their counterpart in barbarians, who threaten to destroy the empire from without.

The development of a professional network, as well as long-standing disputes, among the most prominent representatives of Czech modernism at the turn of the 19th and 20th centuries - F. X. Šalda on the one hand, and Arnošt Procházka and the Moderní revue (especially Jiří Karásek) on the other - can be traced through several stages. First, 1893-1895, a period of mutual curiosity and emerging factions, from the earliest meeting up to the formal manifestation of Česká moderna, which was preceded by the establishment of the Moderní revue as first independent literary platform of the 1890s. Second, 1895-1900, a period in which various trends converged in the connection of art to life and society, and in a confrontation with other emerging, alternative concepts of modernism, namely Synthetism. Third, 1900-1910, a period that looks back, from the strata of generational polemics, culminating in the controversy surrounding Šalda's pseudonyms, to the accusation of Karásek in what has come to be known as the anonymous letters affair. Fourth, 1910-1925, when each side declared hostility towards, or simply ignored, the other's role in Czech modernism, from the conclusion of the anonymous letters affair to Procházka's death. This study focuses in particular on the two initial periods, on the roots of the polemic, and on key moments in the 1890s: that is, on the onset and gradual differentiation of modernist literary creation and criticism in all its forms, on the transformations and extremes of the polemic as the example of a genre whose essence is dialogue and misunderstanding in equal parts. While the polemic is often rife with personal attacks, it also tends to crystallize in a mirror that reveals the collisions and transformations of Czech modern aesthetic thinking, and that illuminates connections and transitions in the field of literary and cultural production. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Though not large in scope, the correspondence of František Kašpar and Jindřich Šimon Baar from the years 1917C1923 is interesting. It serves as a reminder that there is in the archives of the Literature Archive of the Museum of Czech Literature a wide range of personal papers of Czech Catholic and Evangelical clerty -- of authors, philosophers, theologians, teachers, mathematicians, historians, archivists, art-historians, ethnographers, translators, editors, collectors etc. In 2016, the papers of František Kašpar have been acquired. The correspondence offers information about the then Catholic press and especially about the magazine Týn, which was being published between 1917 and 1921 and in which Kašpar worked first as an author and later as an editor. Of value are also insights into and assessments of the situation within the Church, of Kašpar's colleagues within the clerty (mainly the criticism of Karel Dostál-Lutinov and of Moravian Church circles) as well as of Church dignitaries (mainly Baar's views and insights concerning the then Prague archbishop Maria Pavel Josef Antonín, count Huyn). Besides that, the correspondence is interwoven with the personal friendship of the two men linked by their love of literature and writing. František Kašpar, by ten years J. Š. Baar's junior, does repeatedly emphasize in his letters to friends how important and stimulating it was for him that Baar appreciated his poems. However, as the letters progress it is impossible not to glimpse between the lines the big difference between their characters and their views. This difference deepens, indeed becomes polarizing especially with the historical development following the establishment of the Czechoslovak Republic. While Baar follows the path of public engagement and reforms, Kašpar remains on conservative Catholic positions, which suited him. Eventually, this polarization leads to the termination of their corresondence in 1923. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article first introduces the reader to the topic of the aestheticism of Decadent Symbolism by outlining the theatricality of the nineteenth century. It describes Aestheticism as a path to a new authenticity and therefore also to ethics, with the aim of transforming life into a work of art, subordinated to the ideal of beauty. It then discusses Jiří Karásek ze Lvovic's (1871-1951) strategies of auto-stylization, particularly his desire to live ambivalently, and thus multiply and vary his appearance. At the same time, the article supports this endeavour with analyses of Karásek's use of intertextuality and a carefully planned strategy of communication in his literature. It interprets Karásek's gallery as a monument to its founder, providing information (as do his works of literature and other activity) about his personality, and it analyses two levels of the collection in detail, providing a picture of him and his impenetrable multiplicity of faces - namely, a set of books containing dedications to Karásek and a collection of his portraits by various painters. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]